Public Participation, Group Inclusion, and the Durability of National Constitutions

Abstract Does the process of writing a constitution have any impact on its durability? Using a cross-national analysis of 209 constitutions adopted since 1974, this study shows that the broader inclusion of different societal and political groups in constitution-making processes, rather than mere public participation, positively correlates with constitutional durability. Following self-enforcement theories, this study argues that to be self-enforcing and enduring, a constitution should be viewed as “fair” by every group in society to create a supporting constituency. This study suggests that an inclusive process can result in a “fair” constitution, which is deemed beneficial to every group in society and garners their willingness to defend and support the terms of the constitution. Confirming this argument, our statistical analysis shows that inclusive constitutions have 54 percent lower risk of replacement than noninclusive constitutions.